Safe Streets for All

Defining the problem

For decades, the success of a transportation system was judged by how quickly and efficiently motor vehicles could get from point A to point B, using speed as a measure of success. Transportation infrastructure was built to this standard, dividing communities, limiting multimodal access, and endangering everyone using the streets. Street designs reflected this philosophy, and drivers have been empowered to believe that motor vehicles are the number one priority and other street users are obstacles to moving swiftly to their destinations. Unfortunately, this philosophy still presides on a majority of the streets in the United States, particularly in the suburbs and rural areas.

Measuring success with faster speeds leads to wider streets, motor vehicle prioritization in our traffic signal operations, limited space for pedestrians / cyclists / other micromobility users, and inequity in our transportation network. These transportation network characteristics lead to safety concerns for vulnerable travelers. Faster speeds (mobility measures) benefit motor vehicles but correlate directly to severe injuries and fatalities in crashes. This compounds the challenge to disadvantaged community members to access essential services, as they rely more on transit, cycling, and walking due to the high cost of owning an automobile.

Safety first

City of Harrisburg, PA, Vision Zero Action Plan

Almost all local jurisdiction master (comprehensive) plans include goals to maximize mobility, accessibility, and safety. Generally the objectives and performance measures emphasized mobility factors in the past, but now our industry leaders rank safety first, then accessibility for all users of all abilities, then efficient mobility by all.

Tools such as high injury networks and a shift in federal funding towards multimodal safety and accessibility have emerged to build momentum for this change. Data driven safety analyses identify the network segments with the worst crash rates, and “equity lenses” have been applied to ensure the safety improvements help disadvantaged communities.

Organizations such as the Vision Zero Network and NACTO have identified this long standing safety concern and led efforts to change the measure of success for transportation systems.

implementing change

The Complete Streets network approach in planning ensures viable options for all modes of travel. Progressive street design standards, by street type, identify target speeds to align the street function and community environment. Transition areas and special overlay zones identify transitions from connecting streets to activity centers and areas such as school zones that require additional safety measures.

Now, we just have to address implementation: converting streets originally designed to optimize motor vehicle mobility to safe, accessible, efficient streets aligning with the surrounding community values and needs. As we look towards zero severe injuries and fatalities on our streets, retrofitting challenges such as sufficient right-of-way, modal prioritization, and curb space management have emerged to the top.

Implementation can be conducted proactively with new street designs and operations policies (modal prioritization) or retroactively with traffic calming / speed management strategies and tactics. Regardless, street owners should involve internal and external stakeholders to make streets safer, well beyond the traditional traffic engineering division of an organization. Executive (policies), evaluation, engineering, engagement, education, enforcement, and equity specialists should collaborate to eliminate severe injuries and fatalities on our streets.